TC_2502_LAB-GRAY_SCO.cxf and i1io

I have been trying to use this patch chart for profile optimisation. I print the charts for the io but, when I try to measure them, i1Profiler only asks for three locations, scans one row, and stops.

I generated a chart using the random patch generator. It works as expected. Asks for four locations, and then reads the chart.

I’m stumped. I really want to see how well this works, so it looks like a lot of scanning with an i1Pro, unless someone can point out what is wrong.

Hi Jeff,

I went through your process and everything seems to work fine. I point out the 3 corners and the IO goes ahead measures each line in succession. I’m using an iO2 table with an i1Pro 2 and i1Profiler v1.5.0 (I haven’t updated to the latest quite yet.) Do you have a different setup?

Hi Pat,

Thanks for doing that. My setup is an io with latest firmware, i1Pro and Profiler with 1.5.4. With my setup, it will sometimes read line 1 and stop, or not even read the line.

It may be worth trying an earlier version of Profiler. I assume that I can restore it from Time Machine.

FYI - You can download all versions of the app from the X-Rite website.

This may sound like an obvious question, but does the error occur only when reading an optimisation chart or when trying to read/measure the initial profiling target also?

What happens if you attempt to measure a much smaller optimisation target, say, perhaps 200 or 255 patches instead of 2,500 (!!) patches? Just out of curiosity, if your chart is all in grey, and in Lab, why bother having SO many thousands of patches? That would mean you’re measuring the Lab greyscale in increments of about 1/25th of an L* or about 0.04L* from one patch to the next. Doesn’t that sound rather extreme to you? Wouldn’t it suffice to have just 100-200 L* patches, especially if they’re all some shade of grey?

Or am I misinterpreting the title of the chart? Even if I am, so you actually see any kind of visual benefit from having such a huge optimisation chart? Have you compared say, optimising a specific profile with 100 patches and then going back and optimising the same profile but with 200 or 500 patches to see if there really is any tangible evidence that you’re not wasting your time, effort and money?

I’ve not yet tried optimising a profile but maybe you could get around the problem by reading the optimisation chart just as if it were any normal profiling target and then just sAve the file and load the saves file into the optimisation process? I’m guessing you must be able to read the initial target or you wouldn’t have a profile to optimise in the first place, right?

Hope you get it sorted Jeff.

Thanks Aaron. I’ll get it from the website.

I can read a profiling target with no issues.

I’m using the 2500 patch target after reading this: … -profiler/

I also have a 900 patch chart which Andrew Rodney sent me. They both get the same result.

I just tried reading it as a normal profile. The file is a .CXF not a .PXF so the normal profile process won’t open it.

Coming back to this after a few years, I just want to get the best profile that I can. I’m back on the learning curve yet again.

I just downloaded 1.5.0. It gets the same result. Read line 1 and stop.

I have the same problem, and trying to get help from X-Rite. It did work for me in 1.5.0, but somewhere down that path it suddenly just read one line and then stops. It’s gotten to the point where I’ve stopped using the iO.

I’m travelling at the moment and can’t get near a machine, also apologies for not posting this earlier. I found that by saving the file as the same sort of file as a normal target, it worked. Off the top of my head, I can’t remember the extensions, getting old.

I used that optimizing process by measuring with my i1Pro2. But the results weren’t that convincing. I got a much smoother print when I used the non-optimized profile. Also the curves in ColorThink showed a better, more gray balanced profile with the non-optimized profile.

Thanks Stefan. I’ll take a look again when I get back.